SNIP>
>I've dealt with HMOs, Private Practice and Medicare (my gradfather). I vastly prefer private practice. If a single-payer system is enacted then I lose that choice.
>
>Besides, fundamentally, I want less government in my life not more.

Our medicare system here isn't perfect by any means, the most common problem being long wait times for things that shouldn't be waited on.

But I do want to clear up a big misconception you seem to have regarding the implications of "single payor", and that is that you lose choice.

I can go to whichever doctor I want, whenever I want.
There are now apparently checks in place to ensure that a patient doesn't visit too many doctors in a short period (to get multiple presecriptions or because they didn't like what they heard from the 3 first doctors in the same 1-2 days, etc) but that's it.

I also generally cannot get to see a specialist unless referred by a regular doctor or other specialist. But otherwise I have NO RESTRICTIONS on who I see or when I see them.

I also don't have hassles, EVER, with some clerk denying coverage of a procedure, nor does my doctor. It is true that in some cases, known to the doctors, they have to obtain prior approval for a specific course of treatment but:
a) those are rare (I understand less than 10 such exist here);
b) the doctors know about them and know what's needed.

Finally, I NEVER have a hassle with the medicare administrators. I never have to fight for anything. I never have surprises on a bill - I don't ever see a bill. The most that I ever see from medicare are:
a) every 5 years I have to renew my covergae card;
b) once in a very blue moon (once in 20 years for me) a patient may get a short note and a post-paid return envelope asking them to confirm that they saw Dr. X for condition Y on date Z.

But your need to have less government in your life, and insurers reminding you as often as they need to about how bad single-payor is, precludes you ever seeing any benefits to a proper medicare system.

cheers